realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Dealing with multi-processor or multi-core

To: REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: Dealing with multi-processor or multi-core
From: Giovanni <rbml at alphaview dot com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 09:05:50 -0700
Authentication-results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of realbasic-nug-bounces at lists dot realsoftware dot com designates 66.116.103.65 as permitted sender) smtp dot mail=realbasic-nug-bounces at lists dot realsoftware dot com
Delivered-to: listarchive at realsoftware dot com
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <p06240802c4657bd7c318 at [62 dot 161 dot 36 dot 122]> <41B4C50C-AB85-4975-B2AE-C6A4DD49D787 at inspiringapps dot com>
Very good joe.

Giovanni
•••••••••••••••••

On May 30, 2008, at 7:18 AM, Joe Strout <joe at inspiringapps dot com> wrote:

> On May 30, 2008, at 3:40 AM, Jean-Luc Arnaud wrote:
>
>> My upgrade plan finishes soon and before paying for a new plan, I
>> would like to get information about RB and multi-processor  
>> management.
>
> Use a helper app (perhaps via the Shell class).
>
>> A lot of messages on this list claimed about the fact that RB does
>> not use more than one processor (or one core) at a time. it is
>> incredible and unacceptable !!
>
> Get over it.  Preemptive multitasking is, in general, very bad mojo.
> If you access ANY functions that are not thread-safe (and this would
> include pretty much the entire framework, as well as many of the OS
> functions that you use even for simple things like drawing to a
> window), then your program will have obscure bugs that will crop up in
> odd circumstances after your software is released.  The Windows
> platform layer used to use preemptive threads, and it was a nightmare
> -- one that ended only when they coded a cooperative multitasking  
> system like the Mac already had.
>
>> Would I be obliged to switch to C++ or other, in order to get high
>> performances ?
>
> No, you would have the same limitations in any language; it's just
> that those other languages would cheerfully let you shoot yourself in
> the foot.  RB tries to prevent that when it can, and this in one of
> those situations where it easily can.
>
> To make use of multiple processors safely (in ANY language), you need
> to divide your work into separate processes.  In RB, the best way to
> do this is via a helper app that you would access via the Shell.  It's
> not that hard to do, and it's 100% safe.
>
>> I hope no, because I like RB and its object-oriented language, its
>> graphic interface, the ability to call dll or libraries, to compile
>> for Mac, Windows and Linux (and a lot of amazing other features). But
>> if RS does not plan to deal with multiproc/multicore, I will have to.
>
> Well, good luck with that.
>
> Best,
> - Joe
>
> --
> Joe Strout
> Inspiring Applications, Inc.
> http://www.InspiringApps.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
> <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
>
> Search the archives:
> <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>